| Fallacy of Four Terms |
|
You are here:
Meaning
>
Christian Witness
>
Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies
>
Fallacies of Invalid Form
>
Fallacy of Four Terms
|
Logical Fallacy of Four TermsThe fallacy of four terms is a formal fallacy that covers up the problem when reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. The logical fallacy of four terms occurs when a fourth term is included in a syllogism. Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Four Terms
By introducing two meanings of the word, evolution, there is a fourth term introduced into the syllogism. "Science ("Science" means the scientific observations that are made in the present regarding processes that are continuing in the present) has helped mankind in many ways including medicine, transportation, and advances in nutrition." "Evolution is science. ("Science" means the stories about the past that are made up to interpret observations in the present in a way that eliminates the actions of God in the past)." "Therefore, evolution has helped mankind in many ways, including medicine, transportation, and advances in nutrition." By introducing two meanings of the word, science, there is a fourth term introduced into the syllogism.
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionFormally Correct Fallacy Affirming the Consequent Commutation of Conditionals Affirming a Disjunct Denying the Antecedent Illicit Process Illicit Major Illicit Minor Invalid form using All Invalid form using \"Some\" Unwarranted Contrast Denying a Conjunct Positive Conclusion from Negative Premises Illicit Affirmative Existential Instantiation Exclusive Premises Fallacy of Necessity Fallacy of False Conversion Illicit Contraposition Hooded Man Fallacy Confusing \"if\" with \"if and only if\" Improper Transposition Invalid form using \"OR\" Confusion of \"Necessary\" with a \"Sufficient\" Condition Galileo Argument (Formal) Four Terms Fallacy Recently Viewed |
